School of Health, Nursing and Midwifery, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley, UK.
Health Expect. 2012 Jun;15(2):126-38. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00684.x. Epub 2011 May 25.
Socioeconomically deprived women are at greater risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Research tends to focus on access of services. Yet access may not equate with the equity of services for women from different socioeconomic backgrounds.
To determine whether pregnant women's perceptions of antenatal provision differed in relation to their socioeconomic deprivation ranking (determined by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2006).
A longitudinal, qualitative study with comparative antenatal case studies between January 2007 and April 2009.
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Cases were primigravida women from 'least deprived' (n=9) and 'most deprived' (n=12) geographical areas within one local authority in Scotland.
Data were analysed using case study replication analysis.
There was little difference in access to antenatal services between the 'least' and 'most' deprived groups. Perception of care differed in relation to the level of 'engagement' (defined using constructs of: language and personalization of care; power and relationships; and health literacy). Engagement was evidenced in most of the 'least deprived' cases and almost none of the 'most deprived' cases. Specifically, socioeconomically deprived women described less evidence of personal connection to their own care, effective communication and the opportunity for shared decision making.
In women from socioeconomically deprived areas, access may be a less useful indicator than engagement when assessing antenatal service quality. As engagement levels may be one method by which to predict and improve health outcomes, a more equitable antenatal service may need to be developed through the early identification of those women at risk of non-engagement.
社会经济地位低下的妇女面临更大的不良妊娠结局风险。研究往往侧重于服务的可及性。然而,可及性并不等同于不同社会经济背景的妇女获得服务的公平性。
确定孕妇对产前服务的看法是否因社会经济剥夺程度的不同而有所不同(通过 2006 年苏格兰多重剥夺指数确定)。
一项纵向、定性研究,对 2007 年 1 月至 2009 年 4 月期间的产前案例进行比较。
地点/参与者:案例为苏格兰一个地方当局中来自“最不贫困”(n=9)和“最贫困”(n=12)地理区域的初产妇。
使用案例研究复制分析对数据进行分析。
“最不贫困”和“最贫困”两组之间获得产前服务的差异很小。护理的认知因“参与度”的水平而有所不同(使用语言和护理个性化、权力和关系、健康素养等结构来定义)。“最不贫困”组中的大多数案例都有参与,而“最贫困”组中几乎没有案例有参与。具体来说,社会经济地位低下的妇女描述了与自身护理、有效沟通和共同决策机会较少的联系。
在社会经济地位低下的妇女中,评估产前服务质量时,可及性可能不如参与度有用。由于参与度可能是预测和改善健康结局的一种方法,因此可能需要通过早期识别那些可能不参与的妇女,来开发更公平的产前服务。